99.9% of IGF and analogues on the market is useless

Joined
Jul 17, 2017
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Very interesting but completely false.
I am a R&D biochemist. While many of the igf peptides sold online are fake or are less than 70% pure, some are real. Get them tested , reverse phase hplc and page electrophoresis.
synthetic igf will bind as well as that which is bio synthesized (rDNA)
the most important test is binding affinity, how much of the peptide actually binds to the receptor.
Also,any peptide over 60 amino acids long is not feasible by solid phase synthesis , only recombinant DNA using bacteria can efficiently achieve this.
Please check your science before making assumptions or uneducated guesses.

[h=3]Abstract[/h]Insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), whether recombinant, chemically-synthesised or purified from bovine colostrum, was equipotent in radioreceptor assays with IGF-1 or insulin-like growth factor-2 (IGF-2) as radioligand as well as in its ability to stimulate protein synthesis in L6 myoblasts. The N-terminal truncated, destripeptide derivative of IGF-1 was approximately 7 times more potent than IGF-1 in the protein synthesis bioassay. This increased activity occurred equally with the peptide purified from bovine colostrum as with chemically-synthesised material. The higher potency of the truncated form was not associated with an increased ability to compete for IGF-1 binding to L6 myoblasts.
 

BigSwolePump

Elite
Joined
Apr 1, 2017
Messages
4,012
Reaction score
4,832
Points
193
Very interesting but completely false.
I am a R&D biochemist. While many of the igf peptides sold online are fake or are less than 70% pure, some are real. Get them tested , reverse phase hplc and page electrophoresis.
synthetic igf will bind as well as that which is bio synthesized (rDNA)
the most important test is binding affinity, how much of the peptide actually binds to the receptor.
Also,any peptide over 60 amino acids long is not feasible by solid phase synthesis , only recombinant DNA using bacteria can efficiently achieve this.
Please check your science before making assumptions or uneducated guesses.

Abstract

Insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), whether recombinant, chemically-synthesised or purified from bovine colostrum, was equipotent in radioreceptor assays with IGF-1 or insulin-like growth factor-2 (IGF-2) as radioligand as well as in its ability to stimulate protein synthesis in L6 myoblasts. The N-terminal truncated, destripeptide derivative of IGF-1 was approximately 7 times more potent than IGF-1 in the protein synthesis bioassay. This increased activity occurred equally with the peptide purified from bovine colostrum as with chemically-synthesised material. The higher potency of the truncated form was not associated with an increased ability to compete for IGF-1 binding to L6 myoblasts.
You don't get to just come here and on your first post, attempt to discredit members by quoting an abstract without a single shred of evidence. This post was started in 2014. Post in the introduction section and identify yourself then pick a recent post to debate or maybe just go fuk yourself.

BTW I am Jesus Christ because I said so on the internet, Mr R&D Biochemist....

PS: No one is going to buy your shit here so don't try to advertise. KThanks
 

PillarofBalance

Elite
SI Founding Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2012
Messages
20,402
Reaction score
18,204
Points
0
Very interesting but completely false.
I am a R&D biochemist. While many of the igf peptides sold online are fake or are less than 70% pure, some are real. Get them tested , reverse phase hplc and page electrophoresis.
synthetic igf will bind as well as that which is bio synthesized (rDNA)
the most important test is binding affinity, how much of the peptide actually binds to the receptor.
Also,any peptide over 60 amino acids long is not feasible by solid phase synthesis , only recombinant DNA using bacteria can efficiently achieve this.
Please check your science before making assumptions or uneducated guesses.

[h=3]Abstract[/h]Insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), whether recombinant, chemically-synthesised or purified from bovine colostrum, was equipotent in radioreceptor assays with IGF-1 or insulin-like growth factor-2 (IGF-2) as radioligand as well as in its ability to stimulate protein synthesis in L6 myoblasts. The N-terminal truncated, destripeptide derivative of IGF-1 was approximately 7 times more potent than IGF-1 in the protein synthesis bioassay. This increased activity occurred equally with the peptide purified from bovine colostrum as with chemically-synthesised material. The higher potency of the truncated form was not associated with an increased ability to compete for IGF-1 binding to L6 myoblasts.

You haven't demonstrated that the bottles of whatever these research chemical companies are selling are indeed IGF.

In fact I don't see the point of your post at all.
 

gymrat827

Elite
SI Founding Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
6,771
Reaction score
1,900
Points
198
You haven't demonstrated that the bottles of whatever these research chemical companies are selling are indeed IGF.

In fact I don't see the point of your post at all.

right, your first post here is to discredit but you have no proof on a iffy subject.

Okay, thank you for your knowledge, i was still buying LR3
 
Joined
Jul 17, 2017
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Points
0
A) I do not sell or advertise for ANY company. I have personally tested products from companies interested in knowing if the compounds they are buying(mostly from China) are real or counterfeit, and how is it that the pharma igf-1 is 10x the price of what is seen being sold by online peptide companies.
My point was, whether they are synthetic or from recombinant DNA, they can still bind to the receptor, and what is important is how much actually binds. If you have only a 10% binding affinity , then 100mcg would be required to get 10mcg to bind. A blood test for igf 1 may well reveal high blood serum levels, but says nothing about how much bound to the receptor (if any) This is why so many people see no results. Most of what is out there is garbage. Receptor grade igf 1-lr3 is about 35,000/gram
or 250 to 600$ per mg . The first thread suggested that only rDNA igf is functional, and that isn't the case. Synthetic igf will bind also. NONE of these peptide companies manufacture the peptides, they buy it from China, label it and re-sell it.
The only way to really know what you have is to get it tested.
 
Joined
Jul 17, 2017
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Thanks Jesus, but I don't think he would go tell people to "fuk"themselves
he would probably go to college and get an education first
 

Redrum1327

Elite
Joined
Jan 22, 2014
Messages
2,151
Reaction score
1,174
Points
113
You're not helping your case. Anyone with a brain will have their products tested to make sure they're not throwing away money over and over. You basically just stated everything we already knew and had already been mentioned. Thanks for your .02 tho :)
 

PillarofBalance

Elite
SI Founding Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2012
Messages
20,402
Reaction score
18,204
Points
0
A) I do not sell or advertise for ANY company. I have personally tested products from companies interested in knowing if the compounds they are buying(mostly from China) are real or counterfeit, and how is it that the pharma igf-1 is 10x the price of what is seen being sold by online peptide companies.
My point was, whether they are synthetic or from recombinant DNA, they can still bind to the receptor, and what is important is how much actually binds. If you have only a 10% binding affinity , then 100mcg would be required to get 10mcg to bind. A blood test for igf 1 may well reveal high blood serum levels, but says nothing about how much bound to the receptor (if any) This is why so many people see no results. Most of what is out there is garbage. Receptor grade igf 1-lr3 is about 35,000/gram
or 250 to 600$ per mg . The first thread suggested that only rDNA igf is functional, and that isn't the case. Synthetic igf will bind also. NONE of these peptide companies manufacture the peptides, they buy it from China, label it and re-sell it.
The only way to really know what you have is to get it tested.

This makes your point a hell of a lot more clear then your first post.

So this thread started pretty much as an experiment by Cobra Strike. For a couple years we have been saying there isn't a chance that cheap Chinese and research chemical company IGF is legitimate quality regardless of synthetic or recombined.
 
Joined
Jul 17, 2017
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Points
0
The point was in response to what started the thread, that ONLY Igf made from recombinant DNA (e.coli) is biologically active..or will bind. The abstract is from a published medical article in which it clearly demonstrates that synthetic igf will bind to the receptors, quite well actually.

.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/2962574/


Look up solid phase peptide synthesizers or microwave peptide synthesizers. This is how peptides are made in the lab, but are efficient up to Amino acid sequences(residues) of 60.
Igf is 70 , igf 1 lr3 83.
What the Chinese do is synthesize smaller pieces , say 20 aa's long and basically "glue" them together. This process leaves impurities and unwanted residues behind. They may have the sequence correct, but this is just the linear chain.
Think of a rubber band, now begin twisting it until it "balls" up..this is the proteins tertiary structure and that is how the protein exists in its natural state , and that is how it fits into the receptor, like a lock and a key.
To make rDNA is a much larger investment and only a few companies in China have these reactors, and they don't sell on the black market.

It won't let me post complete links but here is part of it
.asianscientist.com/2014/10/in-the-lab/revolutionary-tool-joining-peptides/

I have tested many that have the sequence correct, but most are very impure, less than 70% , and the most important test, binding affinity, they are worthless.

But again , I just read that this guy , moppy? started the discussion stating that synthetic igf doesn't work, and the scientific evidence shows that it does.
I only tried to share what I know, as I've studied peptides for a number of years.
 

New Threads

Top